Hockey Widow wrote:I'm not talking about wiener fans on blogs either. Guys like Ron McLean went to great lengths to entice this sort of thing when he went on his rants against the Canucks and in particular Burrows. They have a responsibility to now step up and tell it like it is.

I really really do not understand all the Canucks hatred. Maybe my glasses are too rose coloured but every time I hear the nonsense I just shake my head. So to all you haters out there, how can any of you justify what the Shark players did with their obvious embellishment?

Yeah, with all the embellishment and diving going on and yet only Vancouver has the rep and the refs against them. Having said that, I think people are starting to cotton on to some of the other teams like Boston (that YouTube clip was priceless).

You're right, though. Until the media start embarrassing the league and its officials by calling a spade a spade when they see one, they'll get away with murder.

wafflecombine wrote:Lastly, there really should be some type of performance review on refs to keep them honest but also grow their skill.

Every game is reviewed by a supervisor and the film and comments are then analyzed with the refs in question.

There is apparently a performance scale and those marks result in post season games, games next season, important games worked et cetera.

Guys can find themselves out of the league if there skills are constantly charted at the bottom of the graph.

So, the problem is not the process because it is in place.

The problem is the people who are involved i.e. the power brokers of this stupid league and the arrogance of all involved.

It would be nice if the performance reviews were made public. I know its not going to happen for privacy reasons but it would be nice to see if jack-wagons like Sutherland really do get called to the matt during reviews.

ODB wrote:...but everyone knows I had AV's number two years ago. I was one of the very, very few that said he should have been fired after the run the team made to the finals in spite of him being constantly out coached.

I wanted AV fired after he was out-coached 4 years ago against Chicago 2 playoffs in a row. He had a great run to the Finals, but his weaknesses as a playoff coach were evident the 2 seasons beforehand. Great regular season coach, fwiw. Maybe a team that needs regular season success to get some fans back shwould pick him up.

Lancer wrote: Until the media start embarrassing the league and its officials by calling a spade a spade when they see one, they'll get away with murder.

The media is full of shit too. How often is a bad penalty ever re-played during a game? almost never. It's like it didn't happen. The broadcasters cover it up. Look at effen Fraser's assessment on Sedin's penalty in OT. He says it -had- to be called, even if the ref is 150 feet away and the ref 10 feet away says nothing. The media does a crappy job of "assisting" the league in making a better product.

On really bad calls, the refs should huddle like they do in the CFL, and say "on review, there was no penalty on the play". That alone would make the calls better.

Lancer wrote: Until the media start embarrassing the league and its officials by calling a spade a spade when they see one, they'll get away with murder.

The media is full of shit too. How often is a bad penalty ever re-played during a game? almost never. It's like it didn't happen. The broadcasters cover it up. Look at effen Fraser's assessment on Sedin's penalty in OT. He says it -had- to be called, even if the ref is 150 feet away and the ref 10 feet away says nothing. The media does a crappy job of "assisting" the league in making a better product.

On really bad calls, the refs should huddle like they do in the CFL, and say "on review, there was no penalty on the play". That alone would make the calls better.

i agree that the huddle might work...following that drop the puck in a neutral zone...

Lancer wrote: Until the media start embarrassing the league and its officials by calling a spade a spade when they see one, they'll get away with murder.

The media is full of shit too. How often is a bad penalty ever re-played during a game? almost never. It's like it didn't happen. The broadcasters cover it up. Look at effen Fraser's assessment on Sedin's penalty in OT. He says it -had- to be called, even if the ref is 150 feet away and the ref 10 feet away says nothing. The media does a crappy job of "assisting" the league in making a better product.

On really bad calls, the refs should huddle like they do in the CFL, and say "on review, there was no penalty on the play". That alone would make the calls better.

Seriously, the media (especially TV) will never have the balls to go against the league. When it comes to contract renewal, the media will have a hard time negotiating with the league. There is no such a thing called freedom of speech. If a player, a coach, a GM, or even an owner says something bad about the league, he will be punished. Burrows broke the CODE and the Canucks will never get the BENEFIT OF DOUBT.

Tciso wrote:The media is full of shit too. How often is a bad penalty ever re-played during a game? almost never. It's like it didn't happen. The broadcasters cover it up. Look at effen Fraser's assessment on Sedin's penalty in OT. He says it -had- to be called, even if the ref is 150 feet away and the ref 10 feet away says nothing. The media does a crappy job of "assisting" the league in making a better product.

Honestly what do you expect: "Boy, that penalty call was atrocious. Just goes to show how little integrity there is left in this league, frankly it's hard to stomach- uhh, stay tuned though, especially through the commercial break.."

I thought it was awesome last night when Hughson questioned why there was no penalty on Lucic for the hit from behind but there was on Sedin. Refs call that penalty and the Bruins are done so they dont want to decide the game yet in OT......

ODB wrote:...but everyone knows I had AV's number two years ago. I was one of the very, very few that said he should have been fired after the run the team made to the finals in spite of him being constantly out coached.

I wanted AV fired after he was out-coached 4 years ago against Chicago 2 playoffs in a row. He had a great run to the Finals, but his weaknesses as a playoff coach were evident the 2 seasons beforehand. Great regular season coach, fwiw. Maybe a team that needs regular season success to get some fans back shwould pick him up.

2010 for me, after the 2nd straight embarrassing loss to CHI.

Then again after losing to Boston (yes, even though they made it to G7 of the SCF), piss poor coaching decisions in Round 1 and games 3-7 in the Final after he lost Rome and Hamuis.

Then again after last year's loss to LA and his own admission of not being prepared to play the Kings.

Tciso wrote:On really bad calls, the refs should huddle like they do in the CFL, and say "on review, there was no penalty on the play". That alone would make the calls better.

Problem with that is that in the CFL and NFL the flag is thrown, the play continues, and if, after the officials conference, it is deemed that there is no penalty on the play, then the next play is started where the last play ended.

In hockey how does that work? One official holds up his arm indicating a delayed penalty. The goaltender goes to the bench and the extra attacker comes out. Now it's a man advantage until the soon to be penalized team touches the puck. If the attacking team scores on the play and it is ruled there should have been no penalty then what do they do? Call it back? Well how can they, the attacking team did nothing wrong, they are entitled to have 6 men on the ice, the goaltender being out for the extra attacker is a legal play at any point during the game. However, no coach, and no goaltender, are going to make that call in the middle of a game unless they know that the other team cannot score because as soon as they touch the puck the play is dead. The defending team doesn't have a leg to stand on in this case because they were defending just the same as they would have in either situation. With a pending call coming their way they may even have gotten away with being a bit more aggressive.....

So they now waive off a completely good goal because they indicated a penalty, that they were going to call back, but is now nullified by the goal anyhow?

The referee huddle/conference is a system that can't work effectively in a game that doesn't stop and go play to play like football.

That being said, I do think that one official should be able to overrule the other official with the final say going to the referee who was closest to the play and had the best view on the call. It would mean some of these NHL refs putting their egos on the shelf in favor of getting the correct call made on the ice and bettering the game.

Meds wrote:That being said, I do think that one official should be able to overrule the other official with the final say going to the referee who was closest to the play and had the best view on the call. It would mean some of these NHL refs putting their egos on the shelf in favor of getting the correct call made on the ice and bettering the game.

What if they treat it like an icing.

The closer ref has the ability to "waive off" a penalty call from the other ref. Then they can consult at the first stoppage in play and decide if it actually is a penalty or not.

The whole point of the two ref system isn't to call more penalties, it's to get the calls correct!